Jury Duty Essay, Research Paper

Jury system is a trial system that twelve citizens decide whether defendants are guilty or

not. The verdict

is unanimous. The jurors are all laypersons , as far as law is concerned. There is a reason

for unanimous

verdict. If one jury is against the verdict,it is regarded as being room for doubt.

Advantages of jury system

are direct participation of American people, conventional judgement by people, fair stage

of investigation,

resistance against polictics’ and judical plot, and making of democratic consciousness.

For example, if a

public prosecutor submit unlawful proof without trial permission, counsel makes an

objection to it. A chief

judge can’t admit counsel’s objection. Defendant is at a disadvantage. However, there is a

possibility that

jury system will check rotting of trial. Jurors need not explain reason of verdict to court.

If juries feel way

of investigation is dirty and viorate human rights, they can decide the defendant is

innocnt. In short, jurors

can decide defendant is innocent even if a public prosecutor has disadvantageous proofs

for the defendant.

Juries who are representative of citizen make the decision value about proof. But, Jerome

Frank, one of

delegates of legal realists, criticized jury system in Law & the Modern Mind, 1930. ” A

lot of verdicts are

irresponsible juries’ products of caprice and prejudice, for example, the defendant is a rich

corporation, the

plaintiff is a poor boy and the counsel is an eloquent speaker. Such facts often decide who

wins or loses.”

He characterizes that juries have tendency to like weak people and hate strong people.

Jury system seems

to have many problems. A sophisticated and rich person, a person of position and a busy

businessman do

not want to become a juror, because juries are bound for all trial period and therefore

person who can

afford time for trial can become a juror, such as a housewife, an old person and an

unemployed person. As

a result jurors who have not even seen stock averages are to make the decision for an

important and

difficult case involved in the Antimonoply Law. It is said that citizen’s ability to execute

for jury’s duty is

the problem. But I do not think so. There are not scientific grounds for their abilities.It is

a prejudice.Law

degree and no proper ability to serve as a juror are not closely connected. Perhaps high

educational degree

may become an obstacle of conventional judgement. It is said that Japanese companies

always lose the

lawsuit, because American juries have prejudice against Japanese. Do you think it is true?

The answer is

NO.The probability of winnig a suit, by a jury who represents American citizen, was fifty

to one hundred in

data from 1980 to 95. To my surprise, American juries do not seem to matter nationality.

After all,

hypothesis that American juries have preconception against Japanese and Japanese

companies always lose

suit is not right. Moreover, hypothesis that juries are emotional and sympathize with

defendant, and as a

result the opinion that big companies always loses suit is groundless. The cause of

distrust in jury system

is probably connected to the way of news reports by mass media. Mass media reports

minus images. The

general public believe it is the real image in spite of successful verdicts. The present age

is the one of an

information-intensive society. Many people are influenced by the mass media. If those

people who have

prejudice happen to see a juror who gives a big yawn or dozes during trial, minus image

generalizes with

conviction. Let me give you a concrete example. Under sensational headline of

newspapers, mass media

reports great costs of jury trials as if every trial by a jury costs a lot. I agree with the idea

of jury system. It

is very good that American people participate in judicature. But, many people take a

critical attitude toward

the jury system. I never think that they are wrong. They may say ” We had better entrust

trial to trained

judge.” However, meaning of jury system’s existence is to stick to common sense of

citizens. Providing

whether the man is innocent or not by legal rights all people can exercise is permitted is

more important

than the fact whether the man is innocent or not.

319